Why is warrior getting nerfed?

"

Except warriors are always going to push strength as high as possible for two reasons:

(1) we need the life
(2) we take the node that gives increased damage per strength point

Lowering stat requirements didn't do jack to replace the loss of life. For 600 strength you will lose 750 health. Nobody is walking around say "AWESOME, I don't need to get 600+ strength now!!!" That's just wrong as long as strength stacking provides so much benefit.

"

FPSPV#4195 a écrit :

"

Except warriors are always going to push strength as high as possible for two reasons:

(1) we need the life
(2) we take the node that gives increased damage per strength point

Lowering stat requirements didn't do jack to replace the loss of life. For 600 strength you will lose 750 health. Nobody is walking around say "AWESOME, I don't need to get 600+ strength now!!!" That's just wrong as long as strength stacking provides so much benefit.

Totem and warcry builds are probably meta now though. I find both awfully boring.

"

Strength stacking still benefits totems so being meta, or not, doesn't affect the argument. In other words, Totem builds will still take Giant's Blood and stack strength for maximum damage... and therefore get hit with the same loss of life (-750 life for strength of 600)

Totem builds got a bonus nerf which is "no duplicate skill gem slotting". You want a separate bossing totem (rolling slam) and mapping totem (sunder).

Now we get one totem and we either have to deal with it... or swap gems when you enter the boss arena. Which is the opposite of "quality of life".

"

People talking about why a certain build being nerfed!?!? You are actually surprised by this!?!? They've nerfed almost everything that would make a game fun and fill it with more useless stuff.

Now they threw everything in a blender and changed it all up again and it will lose fans again.

"

FPSPV#4195 a écrit :

"

And why would you not stack STR? Sure, the mace bases STR requirement got lowered, but the difference would be 100 STR, not 300 or so. And you also gain more damage from more STR, etc. Just as an example, my current Smith warrior has 5k life. Once the nerfs come in, he would have 3.7k. That's 1.3k difference, not 600.

How do you arrive at a 1.3k difference? The giant's blood nerf decreases hp by 1 per point of strength. Are you claiming your Smith has 1300 strength?

"

FPSPV#4195 a écrit :

I didn't realize this was controversial. It's pretty clear warriors got nerfed hard--if you read the patch notes. I'll includes text from the notes below:

"

Nyon#6673 a écrit :

"

FPSPV#4195 a écrit :

I didn't realize this was controversial. It's pretty clear warriors got nerfed hard--if you read the patch notes. I'll includes text from the notes below:

It cant be clear, because you dont know all the changes yet, you dont have access to the new skill tree and you also dont fully understand or know how all the changes you are aware of will actually affect your build.

Its just speculation at this point for everyone because you only have pieces of the puzzle.

"

Except warriors are always going to push strength as high as possible for two reasons:

(1) we need the life
(2) we take the node that gives increased damage per strength point

Lowering stat requirements didn't do jack to replace the loss of life. For 600 strength you will lose 750 health. Nobody is walking around say "AWESOME, I don't need to get 600+ strength now!!!" That's just wrong as long as strength stacking provides so much benefit.